Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Ryan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep -- RoySmith (talk) 15:03, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Ryan

Tom Ryan (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

As per a previous AfD, I am resubmitting this. This article fails WP:BIO and is related to Major League Gaming. :: Colin Keigher (Talk) 22:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete - As per nom --Bryson 22:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

*Delete fails WP:BIO - all of these need to disappear. SkierRMH,22:21, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep with the same requests as before. De-jargonize and inclde J0lt C0la's research into the article :) SkierRMH 05:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Do we have to go through this again? I already proved both Tom and Dan Ryan's notability in the last AfD, at the end of the last AfD, it said next to both of their names "Determined that this article is note-worthy. Remvoing from AfD." If you want to go on an anti-MLG crusade, that is your right, but please don't use Wikipedia to do it. I'll give you a cut-and-paste of my original arguments. Whether or not you like it, they meet notability.

    Argument #1 "Keep (Tom and) Dan Ryan. They have plenty of sources, such as a full front page section B article in a large paper, The Columbus Dispatch (unfortunately, you must have a subscription to read the archives). They won the 2005 World Cyber Games in Halo 2, which according to Wikipedia, is "the largest gaming festival celebrated once a year". A few articles related to that: [1] and they are even mentioned in the BBC News article on the festival, which tries to be mostly focused on the UK participants [2] Here's a nicely done interview on a large gaming website, GotFrag, if you'd like to add more than "just their MLG standings" [3] The argument is that Team 3D is notable, they are former members of Team 3D's Halo 2 team. They appear on the MTV True Life: I'm a Professional Gamer as the people to beat that T-Squared just can't defeat. I may be wrong, but I believe that they have been discussed on the gaming channel G4 multiple times. They are #1 and #2 in the MLG league, which I do not believe is non-notable or minor (what other leagues have a TV spot on USA, a channel carried in most homes across the country?) According to Wikipedia notability standards, they belong. They: "are competitors who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, or at the highest level in mainly amateur sports or other competitive activities that are themselves considered notable" "have a large fan base, fan listing or "cult" following" I could add more sources, more, better arguments, but I hope that will suffice, as I don't want to spend way more time on this than necessary. If it doesn't I will keep adding, keep sourcing, I will locate better sources (there are just the first few I found). I will even personally re-write anything that has to be changed or added if necessary. Thank you!"

    Argument #2 (was against someone's comment): "Show me some proof that the "global e-sports circut" considers MLG non-notable, for I've never heard of this. This just sounds like your opinion, which group would you rather push? Even if MLG's "PR machine" is "trying to re-invent history" , they're succeeding, because many people, even non-gamers and casual gamers have heard of MLG, and its members get widespread media attention, making them notable by Wikipedia's standards, which is all that matters. This AfD debate is not about whether you like MLG and their set-ups and gametypes or whether or not they're overshadowing "better" leagues, but whether or not they meet Wikipedia standards to deserve an article, which they clearly do."

    Here's to not having to do this a third time! J0lt C0la 23:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment those strikeouts were made not by me, but by an opposing editor. :: Colin Keigher (Talk) 23:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Again, sorry, I did not know that, though all of my other arguments still apply. J0lt C0la 00:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • (As I also stated in the Dan Ryan discussion...) *Uberstrong keep per J0lt. I wish I had something constructive to add, but J0lt covered it all. Long story short: the Ogre twins easily pass WP:BIO, as they have been discussed in multiple sources and play at the very highest level of their sport. -- Kicking222 01:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per above. --badlydrawnjeff talk 05:33, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Professional computer game players of the top-tier are just as notable as, say, top chess players, poker players, athletes, etc.
  • Delete per nom. Edison 18:59, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, professional gamers that get media attention are certainly notable. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 16:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep with less emphasis on MLG. 2005 World Cyber Games winner. -- DJiTH 23:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Easily meets WP:BIO - Stinkman 22:31 December 29, 2006
  • keep please this top tier competitor is notable Yuckfoo 02:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per above.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 12:59, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.